The way this is framed as a solution to poverty is disgusting but what is wrong with being paid for a blood donation? Blood is needed for medical applications, can't be manufactured, and will be sold at a profit anyways, so why shouldn't the donor be compensated?

[–] OhNoMoreLemmy@lemmy.ml 37 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

It's killed a lot of people.

https://news.northeastern.edu/2024/05/24/uk-contaminated-blood-scandal/

Desperate people sell their blood. They lie about drug use and infections because they need money. High-risk Prisoners had to sell blood at under the going rate, and then this was covered up for profit.

Things have got better with more rigorous testing, but there's always the risk of a new illness or drug that falls through the current tests. There's a reason that most countries ban it.

[–] Shaleesh@hexbear.net 22 points 2 weeks ago

doomjak

Jeeeeeeesus christ okay yep, fucking horrifying. That makes a lot of sense and demonstrates why this is a bad fucking idea. Thank you.

[–] RNAi@hexbear.net 19 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago) (1 children)

and will be sold at a profit anyways

Not in a sane world

"If I don't take advantage of desperate people, taking their literal blood for pennies, someone else will"

speech-r

[–] Shaleesh@hexbear.net 17 points 2 weeks ago (2 children)

I think I could have worded my reasoning better but I do not appreciate being equated with a zionist colonizer.

Regarding the issue I want to make it more clear that my perspective is that of someone who regularly donates blood (because it feels good). I produce blood, which is arguably a form of labor. This blood is then harvested and sold, however I am not compensated but find the idea of compensation appealing. I have noticed that many people in this thread seem to be opposed to something I support and am genuinely trying to understand how I might be wrong.

I hope this didn't come off as needlessly confrontational but I feel that I was misunderstood and was compared to something I find repulsive. Which hurt my feelings a little bit.

[–] RNAi@hexbear.net 13 points 2 weeks ago* (last edited 2 weeks ago)

Sorry, it was mostly for comedic purpose. A less jerk answer

In a sane world blood shouldn't be a commodity.
Even if it isn't a commodity but you still use money to incentivize donation, you run into the problem of "the law is equal for everyone, neither billionaires nor homeless can sleep under a bridge" wink wink.

Of course, blood save lives, and perhaps there are shortages of blood in countries where they don't incentivize donation with money, but I don't know if that's true.

[–] theturtlemoves@hexbear.net 8 points 2 weeks ago

If you live in a country where you have to pay for basic healthcare, and you have an option to be paid for a blood donation you would have done anyway, then by all means take them dollars. The issue is that people who shouldn't be donating - either because it will put them in danger (e.g. they are already too weak), or because it will put the recipient in danger (e.g. because they have some serious infection) will now be encouraged to donate. This is why pretty much every other country bans payments for blood donation.

[–] neroiscariot@hexbear.net 16 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I do this when I can for extra cash, I also do freelance and an etsy store, but plasma money still helps. Here is my beef(s) with it:

Amount paid weekly is stacked to the 2nd donation. So, you generally get $50 for one visit, then $65 or $75 (depending on the specials...yay) for the second. If you don't make your second appointment, you are screwing yourself because...
The visits take awhile. Even with new machines that UNCOMFORTABILY suck the blood out of you to get the plasma, you are looking at 90-120 minutes in there. That's not counting time to get to the center (nearest one is 20 mins away from where I live). That is a huge time suck and
It freaking hurts. I don't blame the staff, but they are trying to stick as many people as quickly as possible. This is not like a regular blood donation where it is a few minutes. Your donation time is about 45-60 minutes. A bad stick will lead to a decreased amount of blood per draw, plus pain. Often, the solution to a bad stick is to just tap the other arm, which then means you have to find a fresh vein the next time you go that week and -You are wiped out after. I am pretty exhausted and hungry after I do this. So, you should probably eat some decent food to compensate, but that costs money. The money you just spent 2-3 hours getting by selling plasma, so you sometimes eat something cheap and feel worse.

I have noticed more and more people donating in the past few years as shit gets worse. With more people doing it, centers can offer less per person because "who gives a fuck?" I know what they take out of me is worth a lot more than what they give me...so it is just a bleak and shitty situation while you are doing it...but hey, money, right?

[–] PolarKraken@lemmy.dbzer0.com 8 points 2 weeks ago

Yep this has been my experience as well. I'd add to that list - a power outage in the middle of a session. None of the staff knew what to do. Big open building full of stations, all active, all down mid process.

After the confusion died down and the staff had been told what to do, they were offering to continue or at least put the partially-centrifuged blood back. I said no thank you for the possible embolism and dipped. I'm an engineer. I know those machines are engineered very well, but I also know the limits of engineering and edge case testing.

Add to that 2 or 3 incidents years later where they wrapped my arm so poorly afterwards that I started bleeding everywhere after a few. One of those being a time I specifically asked them to be careful because that exact person fucked it up last time.

I don't strictly need it these days so I've stopped. But yep, just yet more indignity and danger for the poor, go USA!

[–] stink@lemmygrad.ml 12 points 2 weeks ago (1 children)

I think it's more about the exploitation than anything else.

The author successfully correlated crime with poverty, but instead of offering a good solution to the wealth inequality, they instead think more exploitation would be the solution.

[–] Shaleesh@hexbear.net 4 points 2 weeks ago

Yeah that makes sense. Coming from that angle I can see how this could open things up for even more exploitation. I was thinking more "well if this is happening anyways might as well get paid, right?" Rather than "this is going to be an incredibly degrading new form of exploitation that should not be encouraged."